Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 9798 (GAU)

M/S BORGOHAIN ENTERPRISES AND ANR. v. THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS.

WP(C)/1875/2024 · 2025-08-31

Kardak Ete

Writ Petition (Civil)body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010064292024 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) WP(C)/1875/2024 M/S BORGOHAIN ENTERPRISES AND ANR. REPRESENTED BY ITS MARKETING HEAD ALOK DAS WITH ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT- 4A MAYUR GARDEN ABC G.S. ROAD GUWAHATI- 781005 KAMRUP(M) ASSAM. 2: ALOK DAS SON OF ASHOK KUMAR DAS RESIDENT OF LACHIT GARH PATH GARCHUK GUWAHATI- 781035 KAMRUP(M) ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS. REPRESENTED BY THE SPECIAL CHIEF SECRETARY GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM PUBLIC HEALTH ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT Page No.# 2/3 DISPUR GUWAHATI-6. 2:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM FINANCE DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-6. 3:THE SECRETARY GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM PUBLIC HEALTH ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-6. 4:THE CHIEF ENGINEER (WATER) PUBLIC HEALTH ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT HENGRABARI GUWAHATI-36. 5:THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF ENGINEER PUBLIC HEALTH ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT NORTH ASSAM ZONE TEZPUR. 6:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER PUBLIC HEALTH ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT DHEKIAJULI DIVISION. ------------ Advocate for : MR. M SARMA Advocate for : SC P H E appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS. BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KARDAK ETE ORDER Date : 01.09.2025 Heard Mr. M. Sarma, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. R.R. Gogoi, learned Standing Counsel, PHED appearing for the respondents. 2. By filing this petition, the petitioner has prayed for a direction to the respondent authorities to release the outstanding amount of Rs. 17,69,500/- to the petitioner on account of design and Page No.# 3/3 construction of 50000 litres capacity Hot Pressed Moulded Thermosetting Glass Fibre Reinforced Polyester Resin (GRP) ESR with 16.0 MM. AS staging with suitable RCC Foundation for Gorjuli Patrhar PWSS under the programme under NRDWP of Tezpur Division No.II, Dhekiajuli. 3. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that pursuant to NIT, the petitioner was awarded the above works. 4. Mr. M. Sarma, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has completed the above works with the satisfaction of the concerned authorities for which, the part payment of the outstanding bill of the petitioner has been made by the respondent authorities. However, the remaining amount of Rs. 17,69,500/- has not been paid as on date despite several approaches and therefore, prays for a direction to the respondent authorities to release the remaining amount to the petitioner. 5. Mr. R.R. Gogoi, learned Standing Counsel, PHED submits that instruction in this regard is awaited. 6. Having considered the submission of the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the view that the writ petition can be disposed of with a direction to the respondent authorities to verify the claim of the petitioner and pay the amount claimed, if found admitted. 7. Accordingly, it is directed that the respondent authorities in the department of PHED, Govt. of Assam shall verify the claim of the petitioner within a period of 2 (months) from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order and in the event, if it is found admitted, same shall be released within 2 (two) months thereafter. Writ petition is accordingly disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant